Meta Panel

The Chess Game Comes to France – Shots fired

It may seem callous at first, but I wasn’t struck by the horrific massacre in Paris. A little surprised perhaps, but it merely capped off a bloody week around the world, and Paris got off easy, it’s the game that matters.

It’s still early days to determine exactly what went down, aside from data points like deaths, but the one thing that is 100% certain, the official story is a lie. How can you tell? You only need to listen (and look) for the markers that have become part of the well worn script over the years.

Only months ago, an entire wedding party in Yemen was killed by the Saudi airforce, 138 confirmed dead. This wasn’t the first, nor was it even unusual. Weddings and funerals have all been targets for remotely-piloted death from above. It was also not unusual, because the vast majority of targets in Yemen have been civilian structures, including the symbolic destruction of the Presidential compound on the hilltop. Close to 7000 have been officially killed since the “war” started, not necessarily including those killed in terrorist attacks prior to that; nor does it reflect how many Houthi fighters specifically have been killed, which seems to be closer to 1600. We could then consider this the one airforce even less effective at fighting their enemy, than the coalition supposedly fighting “terrorists” in Iraq.

Where was the protests of outrage? Why didn’t Facebook offer to recolour everyone’s picture with a Yemeni flag? Surely civilians in a country not part of Europe or North America count? What about Beirut, many were killed there this week too? Should we look more closely at the reaction of President Obama when learning about the crashed Russian airliner, notably his refusal to offer condolences, unlike virtually all other national leaders? Are these not PEOPLE?

Back to the Paris charade, we see the media pouncing, breathlessly interjecting their preferred narratives wherever possible, supported by soundbite evidence on cue.

The Finger Points

It behooves us to take a look at who points the fingers, when the fingers are pointed, and which story gains the most traction in the American media. I single out American media here, because of Operation Paperclip, and Operation Mockingbird, providing those “unnamed sources” to corroborate or enhance the story as needed.

When the Russian flight over Sinai came down, within minutes in fact, the story was already leaked via Al-Jazeera, that a bomb was on board. As a reminder, Al-Jazeera is a Qatari state-run media outlet, who’s government is openly on the side of the terrorists in Syria, and a partner of Saudi Arabia in their war on Yemen. Almost immediately after, Egypt’s officials started releasing confusing statements, some saying there was probably a bomb, others saying there was probably no bomb. News outlets who didn’t get the memo speculated it was a surface to air missile, harkening back to the Malaysian flight that was shot down in Ukraine. Then the fingers started to point to terrorism in earnest, we didn’t have to wait long for ISIL to take responsibility after that groundwork was laid in the public consciousness.

During all this, some more distracting information was being released, about the airline having to repair the aircraft after a tail strike on the runway damaged the tail section. The airline was no doubt an innocent party to this “terrorism” and protested the accusations, not only of poor maintenance of the aircraft, but other vague reports of underpaid staff, etc. There seemed to be a clear disconnect in the messages flowing out of Egypt, while the blackboxes were being located.

Incredulously, the U.S. officials said their swanky satellites detected a flash, but were positive that there was no missile contrail. These are the same people that were unable to provide any satellite data or photos of flight MH17, so either they are lying about Ukraine, or they are lying about Sinai, or both. In either case, their accusations and evidence are verbal only, not that this is surprising, evidence can be a two edged sword should you want to change the narrative later. I also believe they still have the Cold War mentality when it comes to military secrets, refusing to show the world just how good their spy satellites really are. Wouldn’t want everyone to know they could mimic Google’s Streetview from space now would they?

That all said, it’s worth noting who points the finger at the intended target first, because the public might get suspicious. The country pulling the strings of the attack would never come out first, either to protest innocence, or to admit they know anything they shouldn’t. It also becomes extremely suspicious when the victim or host country seems to know the answer before everyone else, it could mean complicity, or it could mean their total ineptitude to prevent it. Therefore, we must deduce that the initial source of the leak, or of the intended narrative, is not the antagonist.

In the case of the the MH17 crash in Ukraine, the culprits were limited to the ethnically Russian “rebels”, or the NATO-backed Ukrainians, so it was only natural that it was American media that belched first. Naturally quoting Pentagon officials who would obviously know. The airline company stayed very quiet, suggesting they were not in contact with the flight, and didn’t seem keen to make a fuss, though their tragic loss of another jet over the Pacific Ocean did put them in a uniquely bad position. Interesting that no one examined how an airline could stay in business after the tragedies “losing” two aircraft almost back to back.

How many insurance companies would keep you on a policy if you wrote-off two vehicles mere months apart? How much of a financial hit do you suppose it is to lose a large commercial airliner, and then contend with any subsequent lawsuits or settlements, much less the risk of confidence from travelers? The fact that Malaysian Airlines are still in business today could prove they were quietly compensated, for playing the innocent victim in the story, and keeping quiet, couldn’t it? We know the secretive arms dealing conglomerate, the Carlyle Group, and Jacob Rothschilds benefited to the tune of millions on the earlier crash afterall, despite what Snopes says.

In Egypt’s crash, it is Qatar that’s speaking up before anyone else, a message backed up by the British. Since there was no suggestion that Qatar has an unusually good spy apparatus, we can assume Qatar was uninvolved in the operation itself, though that doesn’t preclude knowing everything about it. A little too soon after, Islamic state took responsibility, which the Russians dismissed immediately. The aircraft was flying well above the range of shoulder fired rockets, and unless the terrorists were able to smuggle 4-axle truck mounted missile batteries into one of two shanty-towns in the Sinai along the route, then miraculously disappear after firing it, it wasn’t shot down from Egypt. Once again, ISIL was the distractingly beautiful assistant to the real magician doing the trick. Hilariously, after Russia officially rejected that story, ISIL insisted they really did it, for real, no foolin.

More interesting is who remained eerily silent, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Both countries that are adjacent to the Sinai desert, both with agendas involving the terrorist groups that Russia had been destroying rather effectively. Importantly, both countries have the means to pull off planting a bomb inside Egypt, and just as easily firing a missile from their side of the border. It is doubtful you heard of the British plane that had to take evasive action in the area due to some kind of missile, just weeks before. Gotta ask yourself, are you a coincidence theorist?

Remember back to 2001, when everything seemed to go wrong in America simultaneously? Secretary Rumsfeld announced a shocking revelation that the Pentagon couldn’t account for trillions of dollars spent, then the Pentagon offices involved in accounting, the exact wing where the records are stored in fact, are mysteriously destroyed. We also learned that Cheney ordered some fighters to stand down after reports of possible hijackings on that fateful day, but later investigations revealed they had sent most of the active airforce far away from New York, some as far as northern Canada for military exercises. You would then be right to approach news of a dogfighting exercise taking place in Israeli airspace with a strong sense of suspicion. A bunch of fighter jets already whizzing around in the sky, well within missile range from where the plane went down, nothing curious about that at all is there? Or was it a backup plan, should a bomb fail to do it’s thing?

Now in France, we have breaking news from seemingly everywhere except the United States. Notably we have a fast progression of narrative from “armed men”, to “terrorists”, to “ISIS”, and subsequently social media declarations that Islamic State did it, plus additional vague threats. Just in the off chance you still had trouble figuring out the message, they happily announce the discovery of a Syrian passport on or near the body of a shooter, who had blown himself up with an explosive vest. He went out in a blaze of glory, but just couldn’t destroy the passport. If that sounds familiar too, we’re supposed to believe the exact same thing happened on 9/11, when a bystander picked up one of the hijackers passports off the sidewalk. Fireballs are no match for passports apparently, even for fake Syrian passports provided by Turkish intelligence services.

While the initial hysteria about the Syrian refugees bring terrorists along for the ride was just getting off the ground, we learned that the French security apparatus knew of these people, and were tracking them for months. Sounds suspiciously familiar to what they said about the Charlie Hebdo shooting, only those guys were supposedly forgotten 6 months before the attack over claimed budget shortfalls. It’s also not like they don’t spy on their citizens, in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks, they passed laws exceeding the scope of even the Patriot Act in America. Should we blame “budget shortfalls” again this time?

Having concluded that this is yet another geo-political chess move, rather than the extra-curricular activity of disgruntled Arabs, we must then turn to the players. The obvious ones, nations we are supposed to dislike, the nations we consider allies, the entities we believe are agitators, and the ones labelled terrorists, all play a part. Some are unwitting accomplices, some are pulling the strings, but there are plenty of clues, and easily defined benefits.

With President Hollande making an impassioned speech to the world, publicly aiming his entire political might against the terrorists known as Islamic State, he was sending a coded message, that France doesn’t want to be the puppet anymore. Promising to be as merciless as those who attacked the nation, he may finally have the unassailable excuse to face down the real evil. This may have been an move designed to punish France, and it may have been a colossal blunder.

Part 2 will look at the bigger picture, whether we’re seeing an epic shift in the battle lines, and what it means for the “war on terror”.